and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
28 Apr 2012, 18:53

2

This post receivedKUDOS

2

This post wasBOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

25% (medium)

Question Stats:

69%(02:15) correct
31%(01:30) wrong based on 504 sessions

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air.

The author is arguing that ____.

A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposalb) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the airc) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequenced) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposalse) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals

Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
03 Sep 2012, 09:48

GetThisDone wrote:

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on therelease of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens,by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by airpollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible formonitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in thechemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposalwill be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author isarguing that ____.A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposalb) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the airc) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of itsintended consequenced) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution ofits proposalse) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals

I was tied b/w option C & D. Option C states the event of "intent going opposite" WILL happen instead of "could" happen. It ignores the if-then condition(in stimulus) and jumps to "then" part.

So why C could be correct?

If the author goes in the similar sense then option D should also be correct.

Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 03:55

navigator123 wrote:

GetThisDone wrote:

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on therelease of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens,by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by airpollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible formonitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in thechemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposalwill be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author isarguing that ____.A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposalb) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the airc) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of itsintended consequenced) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution ofits proposalse) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals

I was tied b/w option C & D. Option C states the event of "intent going opposite" WILL happen instead of "could" happen. It ignores the if-then condition(in stimulus) and jumps to "then" part.

So why C could be correct?

If the author goes in the similar sense then option D should also be correct.

Can anyone help by explaining this question?

c) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence --> as the argument talks about self monitoring and if implementation is given to chemical industry we will have more carcinogens released in air. This aptly answers the question.

d) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals--> to extreme and uses strong words .. so it cannot be correct

Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 06:52

navigator123 wrote:

GetThisDone wrote:

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on therelease of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens,by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by airpollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible formonitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in thechemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposalwill be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air. The author isarguing that ____.A) no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposalb) the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the airc) allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of itsintended consequenced) to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution ofits proposalse) benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals

I was tied b/w option C & D. Option C states the event of "intent going opposite" WILL happen instead of "could" happen. It ignores the if-then condition(in stimulus) and jumps to "then" part.

So why C could be correct?

If the author goes in the similar sense then option D should also be correct.

Can anyone help by explaining this question?

First of all, this is a CR question not an SC. (Just kidding)

You must flow with the stem while reading the options. Here the author is ARGUING, arguing what? Something which is given in the stem, what is given in the stem? not option D(to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals) but our answer i.e. option C (allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence) by stating that "If the past actions of certain polluters in thechemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air"

Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
18 Sep 2012, 13:35

Expert's post

As the question stem says, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens, when earlier it says that the purpose of the proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. So C is the correct answer, since the stem is arguing that the proposal will achieve the opposite of its purpose.

As for the other answer choices, the argument is about the effectiveness of the clean air proposal, so B and E are not right. Nor is the argument about what proportion of chemical companies will comply with the proposal, so A is not right. And the argument is specifically about self-monitoring among chemical plant polluters, and not about self-monitoring in general, so D is not right. _________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
06 Mar 2013, 14:33

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants. The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal. If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air.

The author is arguing that ____. (A)no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal (B)the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air (C)allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence (D)to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals (E)benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicalsNeed help

Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
06 Mar 2013, 18:08

2

This post receivedKUDOS

Expert's post

Hi mun

let me say some thoughts about this question to help you.

1) this is not an assumtpion question, because based on two things (the word that at the and of the question stem ND the mood of the question) this is NOT an assumption question but rather an INFERENCE or MUST BE TRUE question.

2) I suggest you to to go to this topic and go step-by-step throughout the post to improve you Cr skills

This is because if on one hand is useful to post here you questions (we are happy to help you) on the other hand if you do not take control, if you do not have the tools to crack the questions (i. e. study a lot) you do not have a clear compass about: where you go, how attack the question, an efficient strategy to use, and so on....I hope you know what I mean

Now back to the question

Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided to tighten controls on the release of certain toxic chemicals, including benzene, formaldehyde, and other carcinogens, by chemical plants.

Ok here we have a fact that the governement wants to make effective

The stated purpose of this proposal is to reduce cancers caused by air pollution. Yet, the chemical industry, rather than the government, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the proposal.

here we have the purpose of the proposal and the fact that the industry itself should control the implementation of a plan

If the past actions of certain polluters in the chemical industry are any indication of future behavior, the net result of the new proposal will be an increase, rather than a decrease, in carcinogens released into the air.

basically here is stated this: IF the industry control all the situation we will not have benefits; the opposite: we will have worst effects. So from this we can deduce that the industry is not able to do nothing by itself(in a few words)

The author is arguing that ____.

(INFERNCE)

(A)no chemical companies can be trusted to follow the clean air proposal

too extreme as answer and we are not completely sure of this

(B)the chemical industry is responsible for releasing the majority of carcinogens into the air

About this statistic we haven't enough indformation

(C)allowing self-monitoring for the new clean air proposal will result in the opposite of its intended consequence

This is what, precisely, I said in the stimulus. The industry, if it pursues the implementation of the proposal , then the same is not able to do nothing without the engagement of the gov. perfect. correct

(D)to ensure effective implementation, the government should always monitor the execution of its proposals

Is not what we care about. the goverment

(E)benzene and formaldehyde are two of the most hazardous cancer-causing chemicals

The chemicals are not our concern

C is indeed the correct answer

Hope this helps you to comprehend better the whole situation _________________

Re: Under a new clean air proposal, the government has decided [#permalink]
12 Jan 2015, 04:10

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.